Memorandum
MEMORANDUM
TO: Senior Partner
FROM: One Stressed Student
DATE: April 1, 2014
RE: Jenner’s possible defamation claim against Smith
!
!
!
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Under the law of defamation, can a former students statements made about their professor on a blog be actionable assertions of fact?
2. Under the law of defamation, do verifiable false statements that harm ones personality when posted on a blog constitute as actionable?
BRIEF ANSWERS
1. A former students statements made about their professor on a blog can’t be found as actionable assertions of fact.
!
No. The court found that context makes the difference. Since the statements
were made via blogging which is open for criticizing, they are considered opinion and not assertions of fact.
2. Verifiably false statements that harm ones personality when posted on a blog do not constitute as actionable.
!
No. Although the statements can be verified as false, they can’t be found
actionable based upon the context of the statements. Since the statements were made via blogging which is open for criticizing, they are considered opinion and not assertions
of fact. Blogs are not sought by readers to be true facts but expressions of emotion and opinions. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Bruno Jenner is a legal writing instructor at the Bay College of Law. He is seeking to file a defamation law suit against one of his students because of statements she published on an online blog about him. Jane Smith is the student who made the statements and previously took his Legal Writing 1 course at the Bay College of Law by satellite during the 2012-2013 school year. The following are four statements from the post that Jane made: Professor Jenner is:
“not qualified to teach legal writing.”
“awkward, wordy, and unwieldy”
“character is not befitting a law professor”
“hopeless womanizer”
One month after the course ended Jane created a blog post on her personal blog which also consisted of several
TO: Senior Partner
FROM: One Stressed Student
DATE: April 1, 2014
RE: Jenner’s possible defamation claim against Smith
!
!
!
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Under the law of defamation, can a former students statements made about their professor on a blog be actionable assertions of fact?
2. Under the law of defamation, do verifiable false statements that harm ones personality when posted on a blog constitute as actionable?
BRIEF ANSWERS
1. A former students statements made about their professor on a blog can’t be found as actionable assertions of fact.
!
No. The court found that context makes the difference. Since the statements
were made via blogging which is open for criticizing, they are considered opinion and not assertions of fact.
2. Verifiably false statements that harm ones personality when posted on a blog do not constitute as actionable.
!
No. Although the statements can be verified as false, they can’t be found
actionable based upon the context of the statements. Since the statements were made via blogging which is open for criticizing, they are considered opinion and not assertions
of fact. Blogs are not sought by readers to be true facts but expressions of emotion and opinions. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Bruno Jenner is a legal writing instructor at the Bay College of Law. He is seeking to file a defamation law suit against one of his students because of statements she published on an online blog about him. Jane Smith is the student who made the statements and previously took his Legal Writing 1 course at the Bay College of Law by satellite during the 2012-2013 school year. The following are four statements from the post that Jane made: Professor Jenner is:
“not qualified to teach legal writing.”
“awkward, wordy, and unwieldy”
“character is not befitting a law professor”
“hopeless womanizer”
One month after the course ended Jane created a blog post on her personal blog which also consisted of several